If i were doing this, i would beat the eggs with a fork. And i wouldn’t be incorporating enough air to matter. And it’s generally easier to measure liquids by volume than by weight, unless they are very sticky. (Honey and molasses, for instance. And then i don’t weigh them in their own container, i drizzle them slowly into whatever i am planning to put them in until i have enough. So my technique wouldn’t work well for this comparison.)
And yeah, it doesn’t need to be precise.
I don’t know what it is, but there is definitely a difference in the water to protein ratio in duck eggs as opposed to chicken eggs. You can tell when you fry them (which is the only righteous use of a duck egg.). So a whisked chicken egg will probably not have the same volume as a whisked duck egg of the same size.
But the recipe isn’t really by volume, it’s by egg, so if you have half an egg, you have half an egg, and when you mix it with your dry, whatever air is there should mostly deflate, and if it doesn’t, I can’t imagine it making a significant difference.
My friend who is allergic to chicken, including chicken eggs, would vehemently disagree with this.
Shrug, I said all along that an egg is not very good for accuracy, ‘metrologically meaningless.’ But, if you ARE measuring AND insist on using volumetric instruments (for OP’s purpose of comparing eggs between entirely different species, no less), my advice remains to scoop it before whipping in a bunch of air or anything else.
Have you ever in your life weighed an egg for a recipe? Ever seen a recipe that even suggested such a thing? Flour, yes. Eggs, no. I doubt any need to be that pedantic. I’ve seen “large” or “small” before. It should be close enough.
Yes but I wouldn’t expect most people to say the same. I’m into food and measuring instruments and I have a special interest in weighing and force. I do have commercial laboratory balances in my kitchen and weigh and log all sorts of things. Seeing statisical process control improvements all around is quite a curse and kitchens are a big source. I’m happy you asked.
I’m also into antiques, the roadside swap mall & flea market, craigslist, PBS Roadshow kind. Vintage tin egg scales are very, very common today and must have been neck deep in the 50s. Sorting eggs by weight is how it’s done, by law and in practice, today and yesterday.
Eggs are super variable and OP is correct to question equivalence in size and type. I think it’s an interesting thing to wonder about and, if they have a scale & eggs, worth doing right.
they are absolutely in demand at my Farmer’s Market where they sell out first. I think they taste just a little bit richer than duck eggs and mostly eat them fried.
I have not, but i believe commercial recipes routinely do so.
Who whips in air before measuring? The suggestion was just to use a whisk to mix the yolk and white together. As i mentioned above, personally, I’d use a fork. But that’s more because it’s easier to clean a fork than to clean a whisk than it is is because I’d be worried about adding enough air to change the volume. You need to work to whisk air into an egg, it’s not something one does accidentally when that’s not the intent.
Commercial recipes have a specific agenda to be consistent. Not to mention they are probably making huge batches which would require that kind of precision. A regular recipe is not going to expect that.
OK, but I’m going to guess that it’s self-imposed. Like people doing chocolate chip cookies and altering white sugar/brown sugar ratios for spread experiments.
It’s not even about precision. No one is going to count out 126 eggs. For commercial batches, it’s much more practical to use weights or volumes than to count anything.
And even at a dozen eggs or so, it’s probably easier and more accurate to just open eggs into a measuring cup until you have the right volume.
That was kind of my point. Commercial batches are meant to have consistent results, so they would measure like that. Apples and oranges to regular recipes a person might follow. I’ve seen recipes that might specify large vs small eggs, but they don’t tend to list eggs by anything other than number of eggs or number of egg components (egg whites or yolks).
the cake Bible, which is the cookbook i use for most cakes i bake, gives the quantity of eggs in #of large eggs (the US standard), volume, and also weight without shells. When i happen to have eggs that aren’t large (i sometimes buy jumbo or medium eggs from the supermarket, or unsorted eggs from the farmer’s market) i use the volume measures in the book.
OK, I’m reading that book now and it appears to me that it’s meant to give you an average egg weight rather than expecting someone to actually follow that. Or perhaps to gauge a large egg vs a small egg if you need to convert. I still can’t imagine any recipe that would expect someone to discard an eyedropper amount of an egg to get to exactly 50 grams. Despite slight deviations, USDA sizing is supposed to be within a standard.
And when a recipe calls for a cup of diced carrots, no one throws away three little cubes of carrots to get the measure exactly. They may still toss the dice in a measuring cup as they go, and pick the last carrot to peel so they’ll come close to a cup.
Yes, baking doesn’t require “eyedropper” precision in measuring eggs. The volume and weight measures are still useful if you don’t happen to have USDA large eggs in the house, and are using some other size.
Right, but the recipe is not calling for 50 grams of egg. It’s just informing you that an egg is approximately 50 grams. It’s informational, not a direction. I read as many recipes in that book as I could and there was no variation. It was one hundred percent measured in multiples of eggs or egg whites, not the volume/weight of eggs. So, I stand on my earlier comment. No recipe specifies egg weights as a matter of course. (And I’m not talking about commercial recipes done in large batches).
I mean, this is now semantics. She always uses the same conversion between sticks, pounds, and volume of butter, too.
The vast majority of home recipes are designed to use ingredients in “natural” quantities. A number of large eggs. A number of medium yellow onions. A standard-sized can of beans, or evaporated milk, or whatever. I’ve had to adjust a number of older recipes because the size of a “standard can” has changed.
And honestly, if you were using the cake Bible in the UK, where eggs are sorted differently by size, those weight and volume measurements would be helpful.
I thought you might try to invoke semantics. That’s why I mentioned that no recipe varied. They 100 percent were in discrete numbers of eggs or egg whites not variations of those amounts. The tail isn’t wagging the dog. Again, it’s informational to indeed confirm but that’s it. If someone had small or non-standardized eggs, the weights might help to convert, but it is ultimately incidental that the eggs are also listed in weights in addition to their discrete units.
I have an enormous recipe for scones. It calls for 5 eggs. All the other ingredients are also in natural quantities, like a pound of butter.
I often make half a recipe, because they don’t keep all that well, and it’s way too many for my household to eat. I use five and a half eggs. I measure by volume. I stir the third egg before throwing away half of it.